Brett ratner.

Glamorous entertainment industries will get the headlines, but this recent outpouring is going to lead to studies and revelations across the board. If it can lead to some change as well, then good.

I read this report from The Bookseller this morning, on sexual harassment in the publishing industry.

It’s horrific reading but just like all the Hollywood stuff, it’s common knowledge finally being reported semi-officially.

I believe every industry is full of this shit. The creative industries doubly so.

Our company’s had it’s share. We fired a guy a few years ago for pulling his cock out in a performance review meeting with a female superior. The MD makes inappropriate comments on a daily basis but doesn’t think he’s doing anything wrong. 

Hell, when I was just starting out one of my bosses tried to turn a goodnight peck on the lips into a full on tonguing despite my girlfriend being stood right next to her. Obviously the power dynamic is a bit different when the sexes are reversed like that though.

We all know women are treated badly on a daily basis, and if all this starts to clean houses a bit, or make us call it out more readily, then fuck yeah. Bring it on.

Ck has copped to it all.

Learned from spacey, clearly. Did it better.

Everything he's been doing cancelled etc.

Re: CK, I've read a lot of feminists claiming this situation as wholly unique to women on Twitter. It clearly is in a number of ways that are right to highlight and destroy. But then I see them shooting down men who describe similar experiences and reactions with good intentions. Not to lessen what they've been through, but to show support for the cause.

When I was younger I went to a random pub with a mate and ended up playing pool in front of three drunken older women. DS would've rolled with the grabs, obviously, but we'd never played a faster game! To the point that we were potting each other's balls in close-legged, cock-averting panic.

YOU CAN POT YOUR BALLS WHEREVER YA LIKE! <witches' cackles>

It's not comparable, of course, but we were both dumbstruck and embarrassed by it all the same; I mean, what do you do?! Recounting this sort of thing's ostensibly an attempt at unity through a common strand, but disappointingly one that's often filed under what-would-you-know-man.

‘A grope's a grope’ doesn't hold true and we recognise it, I'd just like more feminists to share a dialogue over the differences instead of straight-up shutting down our commonalities. Not because they're wrong about the subject: because of their handling of it. Justifiable misandry isn't the answer any more than men underplaying other men's actions, be that by drawing parallels or simply defending them. I'm dirt-poor, don't have a wife, girlfriend or kids, have a history of mental-health problems and very few prospects... but I'm a white male. I've privilege by association and I can only share my feelings in private and here.

Maybe my attitude is deeply flawed in seeing the online world as an increasingly hostile version of the Yorkshiremen. Divides being driven between groups who should get along because they've all been downtrodden for so long to the point of tunnel-vision. I'm probably included in that. The one and only thing I'm arguing is that loads of men don't know how to respond to flashers and grabbers, either. I imagine it's a far more common thing for men to be guilty of, and that totally supports male privilege as a trigger.

I dunno, I'm just a bit fed up of wanting to stand up for the underclass that I belong to and not having the words (different subject, but in terms of not having a voice). Is that wrong? Sitting here in my one chair as a hetero whitey, it feels like a phantom privilege to me. But then I don't tour the bus-stops with my cock out, I guess.

Facewon wrote:

Ck has copped to it all.

Learned from spacey, clearly. Did it better.

Everything he's been doing cancelled etc.

As a few have pointed out he didn't publicly apologise, though he allegedly did in private some time back.

You could talk Purple Aki down with your numbers chat. Demonstrate ass-to-grass form.

What MH said is true and more besides, I just don't like any singling-out of groups for blanket criticism when the potential for suffering's universal. It's difficult to explain when you belong to the perps. Like an innocent BBC man from the '70s.

I don't worry about my safety, but that's not the case for lots of young men in cities who are involved in situational violence; different kettle, but men aren't invulnerable. Our pub harassment was funny almost as soon as we left, I only object to the argument that men can't (in whatever small number) be subjugated, be it by other men or women (Khmer Rouge were first to mind). I've never had an offer, but I can't see how being a rentboy for a Tory MP (for a realistic example) wouldn't be traumatising.

I'm fine with men not having the right to defend CK's cockjockeying — that's a healthy point to arrive at, but they shouldn't be gunned down on sight for expressing their views honestly. Hiding behind virtue barricades with the same opinions is no good. It's disrespectful to women's toughness, and our copious failings can't be corrected unless we're truthful. That makes it sound like I've things to say to the women; Connery things, but you know what I mean. There's a massive gulf between she-asked-for-it and what-an-arse-but-nobody-died.

Is the worth of my opinion as a straight white dude minimal? 'Course it is. But as long as I'm polite and try to be sympathetic, unity's unity, and I feel that minorities are sometimes prone to pushing away friendlies over semantics. It's Twitter, no? I hope that those who've been discriminated against don't start discriminating (all whites are racist... Israel...).

Boo-hoo, man's upset was the gist of one reply I saw on Twitter, and the guy was agreeing with her about CK, only disagreeing with her view that men can never be mentally affected by similar abuses. I've learnt my lesson and don't comment on this sort of stuff any more (besides this bit). Seems like the best solution. Not talking about games — best solution!

I've never done Thing.

You have the potential to do Thing.

/transmission

Nah, I'm with you on this with children. We don't consider children sensible enough to vote, or physiologically developed enough to drink or smoke, but it is deemed OK to allow them to have life changing, elective surgery/treatment? I think it's sensible to wait.

The reason for offering HRT is to delay the onset of puberty. This delays for example, the growth of facial hair and deepening of voices in boys, and the growth of breasts in girls.

It's not permanent - it pauses rather than stops development. It is absolutely not changing their sex. Secondary sex characteristics are much more difficult to undo compared to being able to prevent them in the first place.

Young trans people have a much higher risk of depression and suicide. Their body developing what they see as the wrong way is a major cause of this. So no, it's not the most medically responsible thing to not offer this form of treatment.

Are there many cases of young people regretting therapy when they're older? I find it hard to imagine a ten-year-old boy who feels like a girl becoming a post-puberty Randy Savage at sixteen. Wardrobe aside.

I tend to favour treatment with the view that it's a serious enough feeling to generally cross-out stereotypical opposites later on. For example, if a boy grows up to be gay without wishing to be a woman, female traits seem less likely to be devastating due to his increased probability of avoiding a macho adulthood. Am I wrong to believe that these collective indicators should take precedence because it's more detrimental if treatment's denied than misapplied? I guess we'll have enough evidence to inform us eventually. It's that degree of misapplication and its fallout.

Parental influence could be a major factor in some cases, where kids might be encouraged one way or the other contrary to their true identities.

I haven't seen the documentary, so I can't comment on the specific case, but it's far, far more likely for someone who is trans to be either outright denied treatment, or made to jump through a never ending series of hoops than it is for a doctor to push treatment on parents.

Parental wise as well, parents are far more likely, even those who are supportive, to push the child to wait, not into treatment.

Can't accept what?

Well you aren't going to get anything other than anecdotal evidence. There are plenty of forums and websites you can go to if you want to do some further reading.

Why should NHS treatment only be in extreme cases, regardless of who is deciding the extreme?

Escape wrote:

the strongest indicator in this case has to be time, as that's also one of the most consistent markers of a deep seated beliefs.

Yeah. If treatment were as effective later on as it is before puberty, I don't think that any of us'd be defending super-early transitions. It's a textbook catch-22.

But conversely, is a child's capacity for longterm decision making as developed as to make early treatment the best possible course of action in these cases.

Pretty sure that science would suggest it's not... So I'm not sure if this really is a catch 22...

...Except in extreme cases, to answer you too, Dants'. :]

Don't forget the impact of the parents in these cases... Not sure if there's a specific manifestation of Muchausen Syndrome by Proxy that pertains to these cases, but that's a big component of this too. So I think social independence should be a critical prerequisite in these cases.

I suppose, deep down, what I'm suspecting here, is an extremely subtle, but no less dangerous form of child abuse.

Oh, another thing from that article that I need to read up on more.

The rights of women
The committee noted the endemic nature of violence against women, and the disproportionate impact this has on Indigenous women and women with a disability. It recommended that Australia increase its efforts to prevent all forms of violence against women.

 The committee again raised concerns about the involuntary sterilisation of women and girls with intellectual and cognitive disability, and recommended that Australia abolish this practice

.

Wait, what?

Here's a thing: http://www.dazeddigital.com/life-culture/article/38039/1/artist-smeared-by-media-after-topshop-transphobia

If they calls themself they, it follows that I, my and mine become we, our and ours. Except it doesn't, because you can identify as neither gender at the same time as referring to yourself in the singular. But in that case my question becomes: is there not a better grammatical workaround, given your willingness to identify as a singularity? 'Cause that's some right clumsy business.

As for the problem, I thought that most changing rooms were just a row of little booths with mirrors and curtains, and were open to all whenever available? It's been a long time since I went out shopping for clothes, though; like, the '90s.